Search

The Victorian Precision Oncology Summit, convened in 2023, was a joint initiative between the Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre Alliance (VCCC Alliance) and the Monash Partners Comprehensive Cancer Consortium (MPCCC) and was proposed to guide a coordinated state-wide conversation about how the oncology sector can overcome some of the current obstacles in achieving equity of access to clinical cancer genomics for Victorian patients. Themes that emerged from discussion groups at the Summit include standardisation, centralisation, funding, education and communication and insights across those themes are outlined in this manuscript. The event served as a large consultation piece for the development of a broader precision oncology roadmap, which explores equitable access to molecular testing for Victorian patients, currently in development by the VCCC Alliance and MPCCC in collaboration with other key Victorian and national stakeholders. While this symposium was a Victorian initiative, it is felt that the insights garnered from this consultation piece will be of interest to consumer groups, clinicians, researchers, educators, policy makers and other key stakeholders in other states of Australia as well as in other countries implementing comprehensive genomic profiling within complex health systems.

Abstract Endometrial cancer (EC) patients with metastatic/recurrent disease have limited treatment options and poor survival outcomes. Recently, we discovered the FGFR2c splice isoform is associated with poor prognosis in EC patients. Here we report the establishment of 16 EC patient-derived xenografts (PDX)-derived organoids (PDXOs) with or without FGFR2c expression. In vitro treatment of 5 EC PDXOs with BGJ398 showed significant cell death in 3 models with FGFR2c expression. PDXs with high/moderate FGFR2c expression showed significant tumour growth inhibition (TGI) following 21-day treatment with FGFR inhibitors (BGJ398 or pemigatinib) and significantly prolonged survival in 4/5 models. Pemigatinib + cisplatin combination therapy (n = 5) resulted in significant TGI and prolonged survival in one of two p53abn PDXs. All five models treated with cisplatin alone showed de novo resistance and no survival benefit. Seven-day treatment with BGJ398 revealed a significant reduction in angiogenesis and CD206 + M2 macrophages. These data collectively support the evaluation of FGFR inhibitors in a clinical trial.

Background Studies showed that vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors could improve therapeutic efficacy of PD-1/PD-L1 antibodies by transforming the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (TME) into an immunoresponsive TME. Ivonescimab is a first-in-class, humanized tetravalent bispecific antibody targeting PD-1 and VEGF-A simultaneously. Here, we report the first-in-human, phase 1a study of ivonescimab in patients with advanced solid tumors.Methods Patients with advanced solid tumors were treated with ivonescimab 0.3, 1, 3, 10, 20 or 30 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks using a 3+3+3 dose escalation design. Dose expansion occurred at 10 and 20 mg/kg in selected tumor types. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability, and to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). The secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and preliminary antitumor activity based on Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors V.1.1.Results Between October 2, 2019 and January 14, 2021, a total of 51 patients were enrolled and received ivonescimab. Two dose-limiting toxicities were reported at 30 mg/kg. The MTD of ivonescimab was 20 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Grade≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 14 patients (27.5%). The most common TRAEs of any grade were rash (29.4%), arthralgia (19.6%), hypertension (19.6%), fatigue (17.6%), diarrhea (15.7%) and pruritus (11.8%). The most common grade≥3 TRAEs were hypertension (7/51, 13.7%), alanine aminotransferase increased (3/51, 5.2%), aspartate aminotransferase increased (2/51, 3.9%) and colitis (2/51, 3.9%). Of 47 patients who had at least one postbaseline assessment, the confirmed objective response rate was 25.5% (12/47) and disease control rate was 63.8% (30/47). Among 19 patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, 5 patients (26.3%) achieved partial response (PR). Efficacy signals were also observed in patients with mismatch repair proficient (pMMR) colorectal cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, and both MMR deficient and pMMR endometrial cancer.Conclusions Ivonescimab demonstrated manageable safety profiles and promising efficacy signals in multiple solid tumors. Exploration of alternative dosing regimens of ivonescimab monotherapy and combination therapies is warranted.Trial registration number NCT04047290.

Background Ociperlimab, a novel, humanized monoclonal antibody (mAb), binds to T-cell immunoreceptor with immunoglobulin and immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibitory motif domains (TIGIT) with high affinity and specificity. Tislelizumab is an anti-programmed cell death protein 1 mAb. We report results from a phase I, first-in-human, dose escalation study evaluating the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and preliminary antitumor activity of ociperlimab plus tislelizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors.Methods Eligible patients previously treated with standard systemic therapy, or for whom treatment was not available or tolerated, received ociperlimab intravenously on Cycle (C) 1 Day (D) 1 and tislelizumab 200 mg intravenously on C1 D8. If tolerated, patients received ociperlimab plus tislelizumab 200 mg sequentially on D29 and every 3 weeks (Q3W) thereafter until discontinuation. Dose escalation for ociperlimab was planned with four dose levels (50 mg, 150 mg, 450 mg, and 900 mg) according to a 3+3 design. An additional dose level of ociperlimab 1800 mg was also assessed. Primary endpoints were safety, determination of the maximum tolerated (or administered) dose, and the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR), disease control rate (DCR) (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1), PK, and biomarker analysis.Results At data cut-off (September 29, 2022), 32 patients had received ≥1 dose of ociperlimab plus tislelizumab 200 mg Q3W. The maximum administered dose was ociperlimab 1800 mg plus tislelizumab 200 mg Q3W. The median age of enrolled patients was 59.5 years (range: 31–79). Most patients (96.9%) experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE); 62.5% of patients experienced ≥grade 3 TEAEs and 50.0% of patients experienced serious TEAEs. No dose limiting toxicity events were reported. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. The RP2D was ociperlimab 900 mg plus tislelizumab 200 mg Q3W. Overall, ORR was 10.0%, median DoR was 3.6 months, and DCR was 50.0%.Conclusions Ociperlimab plus tislelizumab was well tolerated in patients with advanced solid tumors, and preliminary antitumor activity was observed with 450 mg, 900 mg, and 1800 mg ociperlimab. Phase II/III trials of ociperlimab 900 mg plus tislelizumab 200 mg Q3W are underway in a range of solid tumors.Trial registration number NCT04047862.

Abstract Background With the rapid influx of novel anti‐cancer agents, phase I clinical trials in oncology are evolving. Historically, response rates on early phase trials have been modest with the clinical benefit and ethics of enrolment debated. However, there is a paucity of real‐world data in this setting. Aim To better understand the changing landscape of phase I oncology trials, we performed a retrospective review at our institution to examine patient and trial characteristics, screening outcomes, and treatment outcomes. Methods and results We analyzed all consecutive adult patients with advanced solid organ malignancies who were screened across phase I trials from January 2013 to December 2018 at a single institution. During this period, 242 patients were assessed for 28 different trials. Median age was 64 years (range 30–89) with an equal sex distribution. Among 257 screening visits, the overall screen failure rate was 18%, resulting in 212 patients being enrolled onto a study. Twenty‐six trials (93%) involved immunotherapeutic agents or molecular targeted agents either alone or in combination, with only two trials of cytotoxic agents (7%). Twenty‐two (13.4%) of the 209 treated patients experienced a total of 33 grade 3 or higher treatment‐related adverse events. There was one treatment‐related death (0.5%). Of 190 response‐evaluable patients, 7 (4%) had a complete response, 34 (18%) a partial response, and 59 (31%) experienced stable disease for a disease control rate of 53%. The median overall survival for our cohort was 8.0 (95% CI: 6.8–9.2) months. Conclusion The profile of phase I trials at our institution are consistent with the changing early drug development landscape. Response rates and overall survival in our cohort are superior to historically reported rates and comparable to contemporaneous studies. Severe treatment‐related toxicity was relatively uncommon, and treatment‐related mortality was rare.